-5

We already have milestones based on rep. I'm wondering if we could be a bit more helpful to OP's by allowing high rep users to answer closed questions which have no answers.

This would allow OP's to get a bit of help, and would mean that only experienced answerers would be answering these difficult or grey area questions while still stopping them from causing drama.

It would mitigate somewhat against perfectly good questions being held to ransom by users who rarely answer or ask questions at all. Which effectively means that a decent question sometimes has to justify it's existence during which time the OP has probably given up on the workplace and been left with a sour taste.

I can't think of any downside to it offhand.

5
  • AFAIK, there's like a 2-3 hour "grace period" where the UI will say you can't answer, but if you actually still do the POST request otherwise (button didn't update and you still post or via userscript) then it'll accept the answer. – user308386 Nov 5 '18 at 7:21
  • @Magisch good grief, how did you find that out? You software chaps scare the heck out of me sometimes – Kilisi Nov 5 '18 at 7:30
  • 1
    Too much time on meta. AFAIK it used to be 12 hours or something but was changed at some point, let me go dig up the relevant meta post. – user308386 Nov 5 '18 at 7:31
  • 2
    Here's the relevant MSE post: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/91922/… . Basically, in order to use this, you would have to either use a userscript that disables the automatic javascript based update of your answer wizard while composing an answer, or forge a POST request somehow for normal answering. The grace period is "about 4 hours". – user308386 Nov 5 '18 at 7:36
  • not something I want to attempt, but it does show that there is a grace period – Kilisi Nov 5 '18 at 7:37
-7

I think this would help offset the negative mentality that has been recently poisoning part of this community.

1
  • 2
    That would be true only if the negative mentality isn't coming from high rep users. – Joe Strazzere Nov 4 '18 at 23:13
8

That would make closing questions pointless. The fact that it's abused doesn't mean we should abuse it further by side-stepping it completely.

Many times I've gone to the Chat to make a quick case about a question I thought should be reopened, often with positive results.

The problem is closing questions willy-nilly. Let's focus on solving that, and not on throwing the mechanism out altogether.

1
  • it's not a complete sidestep, I dislike the thought that people come for assistance and don't get any at all quite often. I guess this would be open to abuse, but high rep users are unlikely to abuse the privilege. Could even take rep out of the equation so no rep is given for answering it. – Kilisi Nov 4 '18 at 21:14
4

There's no need for such a feature change.

If high-rep users voted to reopen questions that shouldn't have been closed, then they (and others) can provide useful answers.

If you don't vote to reopen, then apparently you agree that the question should be closed and thus have no need to provide an answer.

6
  • I agree somewhat, so perhaps the core problem is not the VTC crew but the votes to reopen?. – Kilisi Nov 5 '18 at 0:02
  • 1
    @Kilisi - well the problem wouldn't exist in the first place without the race to vote to close, IMHO, so no. Without the "VTC crew" as you say, you wouldn't need to write this feature request. But given that, I believe folks should be voting to reopen far more frequently. If you want to answer a closed question (or if you want someone else to answer such a question), then vote to reopen. I know I do. – Joe Strazzere Nov 5 '18 at 0:10
  • 1
    good point, I vote to reopen, but don't initiate it since when I did no one responded but that was ages ago. Nethertheless that's just passing the onus from one group to another. If they don't VTC vrs if they don't vote to reopen, it's not a proactive solution – Kilisi Nov 5 '18 at 1:20
  • 1
    @Kilisi - IMHO, you should be voting to reopen more often. Your reopen vote may cause others to think that perhaps the question shouldn't have been closed. If enough folks start to think this way, maybe more people will get the help they are hoping for. And I know you want to help people. – Joe Strazzere Nov 5 '18 at 13:24
  • I agree, and have started initiating reopens with one success so far tonight I have no problem putting suitable actions to good advice.. I'll give any advice due consideration (for anyone watching) – Kilisi Nov 5 '18 at 13:27
  • 2
    @Kilisi - great! Maybe if enough of us decide to vote to reopen worthy questions more often, we can get people the help I think they deserve. – Joe Strazzere Nov 5 '18 at 13:28

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .